[Clock King]

Welcome to the Hunger Games.

What happened to John Roberts? Lee Doren pointed to an article by Ezra Klein that may explain Roberts' thinking. If Klein is right, Roberts is thinking very long term and playing the game at a higher level than the politics of the moment.

The Political Genius of John Roberts

[e_castillo]

Wishfull thinking.

Long term we can now be taxed on what we do not buy or do. Roberts was a fool. I wonder if it had anything to do with this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291473,00.html

[nerdgirl]

Thanks for the link. What I appreciate around here today are the folks actually trying to make sense of this, by analysis rather than throwing daggers at Roberts for being such a D@#$k.

Not that I didn’t yell “what an a##hole!!” at the TV this morning.

[Hildy]

John Roberts is brilliant. Years from now, we are going to look back on this as the day the revolution began. I can’t believe all the hand wringing on this. It’s silly. it’s going to be overturned. Period. And all at once instead of piecework.

[tanknetter]

If Klein is right, Roberts is thinking very long term and playing the game at a higher level than the politics of the moment.

The problem with that line of thinking is that Roberts' actions would be predicated upon the assumption that none of the Conservative justices will leave the Court anytime soon.

Both Scalia and Kennedy are getting up there in years. I'd give it a 50% probability, regardless of who wins the White House this Fall, that one of them will be gone within the next four years and a 25% probability that BOTH of them will be gone.

And there's no way that the Liberal Wing of the Court is going to give a flying leap about stare decisis and the Commerce Clause precedent set with this decision.

[rdcbn]

John Robert's changed his vote at the last minute under duress.

The reason he changed his vote at the 11th hour was a form of soft extortion.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg threatened to announce her retirement at the end of this term and give Obama the chance to appoint a new Justice in her place if Obama Care was overturned.

If Roberts changed his vote and not strike down ObamaCare she agreed not to retire until the next Presidential term.

Under the circumstances he did his best to come up with the best possible compromise with Ginsberg - one that put the future of ObamaCare directly in the hands of voters in this next election. The fate of Obama Care is now firmly in the hands of the electorate and 2012 will be a referendum on Obama Care.

[OldEarlGray]

That just explains why his decision is political bullshyte instead of judicial conservatism.

[Aetius]

Maybe this decision will work to bolster Robert’s reputation with the mainstream media, but the idea that it will help future efforts to curb federal power is nothing but a baseless hope.

It’s clear that the 4 liberal judges will NEVER cross to the other side on a controversial or high-profile case. So any future cases with the current court will continue to be 5-4 decisions one way or another.